what is the difference between your paragraph and what we already
have? how would it improve on @summary?
On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:48 AM, David Poehlman
<poehlman1@comcast.net> wrote:
> I don't think it is possible to associate a <p> programatically</p
> to a
> table. It might be possible to designate someting inside the table
> to surve
> the same purpurpose as @summary though.
First off, i notice that you didn't answer my question *why* this is
needed.
Second, it seems like you didn't understand my suggestions for how to
associate a <p> with the <table>.
What I'm suggesting is that we could add an attribute on <table> to
point to the element containing the summary. Such as:
<p id="thisIsTheSummary">
Summary goes here
</p>
<table summary-in="thisIsTheSummary">
...
</table>
This way the AT client can find the summary associated with a
particular table.
> I also want to point out that I consider it a grose miss use of
> @summary=""
> required to pass a test as well, miss use.
I don't understand what you're saying here.
> I appreciate the efforts on this but also hear and echo the conerns of
> others that we *really* need to have a good replacement or modify
> @summary
> to do what we need for it to do.
I don't think anyone disagrees with this.
/ Jonas
> On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:37 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:50 AM, David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net
> >
> wrote:
>>
>> <p> this is a layout table.
>> <p> there is no summary for this table...
>> Now, where was that little d?
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand the question? Could you elaborate?
>
>> Not picking on you but we need programatic association and clear
>> markup
>> which @summary provides today.
>
> This would indeed not be the case with the proposal to have a separate
> paragraph (marked up with a <p>) before or after the table.
>
> Could you elaborate on why this is needed?
>
> If we added an attribute like summaryfor="idOfTable" to the <p>, would
> that address all the problems you have with this proposed solution? Or
> adding a summaryIn="idOfPara" on the <table>. I'm not suggesting this
> as a solution, merely trying to understand your complaints with the
> <p> solution.
>
> Also, this problem (if it indeed is a problem) does not seem to exist
> with any of the other solutions proposed. Maciej listed many more than
> I did.
>
> / Jonas
>
>> On Feb 25, 2009, at 1:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:23 AM, David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net
>> >
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> What actually mystifies me and I've been following every nuounce
>>> of the
>>> conversation over a long span on several lists is that there has
>>> not been
>>> shown to be anything satisfactorily demonstrated to replace what
>>> can be
>>> and
>>> has been used as such an accessibility enhancing attribute as
>>> @summary.
>>
>> Two suggestions I've seen so far are:
>>
>> * Use a <p> above the table describing the contents of the table.
>> * Change the definition of <caption> to not just be the title of the
>> table to also be allowed to contain a summary.
>>
>> Both these have the advantage if adding accessibility to all users
>> rather than just ones that use AT clients.
>>
>> Another suggestion I've thought about is using the table@title
>> attribute. Title attributes are already often used to add descriptive
>> information out-of-flow. And title attributes are generally available
>> in visual UAs in the form of tooltips.
>>
>> / Jonas
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jonnie Appleseed
>> with his
>> Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
>> reducing technology's disabilities
>> one byte at a time
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonnie Appleseed
> with his
> Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
> reducing technology's disabilities
> one byte at a time
>
>
--
Jonnie Appleseed
with his
Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
reducing technology's disabilities
one byte at a time